#01Nov 10, 2026
cs.CL
When does text encoding matter for language modeling?
Eugene Jang, Catherine Arnett, Terra Blevins
UTF-8's role as the de facto encoding standard in language models introduces cross-lingual inequities due to its variable-length design. However, the effect that this encoding choice has on model performance remains largely unexamined. In this work, we investigate how text encoding impacts the performance of byte-level language models, comparing UTF-8 with a wide range of other encoding strategies, including other Unicode-based approaches, language-specific encodings, and our own customized encodings. To facilitate our analysis, we propose Aether: a hybrid encoding scheme that uses script-specific encodings for our target setting while maintaining full Unicode coverage through UTF-8 fallbacks, using this framework to model four orthographically diverse languages. Surprisingly, we find that while languages with information-dense characters (Chinese, Korean) significantly benefit from compressive encodings, languages whose characters carry less information individually (Georgian, Tamil) are largely insensitive to encoding choice. In light of these findings, we argue that text encoding should be a language-specific design decision, rather than a universal default.
#02Nov 10, 2026
cs.CV
BoviShift: A Six-Year Multi-Attribute Audit of Visual Cattle Phenotyping Across Animals and Time
Mobasshir Bhuiya Shagor, Nilambar Halder Tonmoy, Md Saef Ullah Miah
Computer vision offers a scalable, non-contact means of estimating livestock traits, but correlated images and video frames make reliable evaluation difficult. Image-random splitting can place views of the same animal in both training and test sets, while deployment further requires transfer to animals captured in future years. We introduce BoviShift, a corpus reconstructed from six consecutive annual cohorts of an operational cattle marketplace collected from 2021 to 2026. It contains 2{,}657 cattle, 10{,}610 still images, and 2{,}566 walk-around videos across nine recorded breed categories. We evaluate three splitting strategies through four configurations: image-random and pooled cattle-disjoint splits over the same development cohorts, followed by separate future-2025 and locked future-2026 evaluations. Using a fixed ResNet-50 multi-task baseline, we assess weight, age, height, breed, and coat color. Differences between image-random and cattle-disjoint splitting are task-dependent rather than a universal leakage penalty. Future-cohort behavior is also attribute- and cohort-specific: breed declines relative to pooled evaluation; mean weight and age performance fails to beat constant baselines in 2025; height remains above baseline; and color transfers well to 2025 but degrades in 2026. Multi-task training improves all five point estimates in a single-seed ablation, still-view aggregation helps selectively, and zero-shot video-frame aggregation exposes a still-to-video domain gap. To our knowledge, BoviShift is the longest-spanning cattle-vision resource combining consecutive annual cohorts with physical and visual attributes.
#03Nov 10, 2026
stat.ME
One Curve, Different Weights: AUC, the Brier Score, Decision-Weighted AUC, and the Policy Youden Index
Yegor Baranovski
AUC and the Brier score are standard summaries of a binary risk score, yet they can rank models differently. We introduce a weighted AUC, AUC$_π$, which weights each pair of observations by how differently a decision maker with probability of acting $π$ treats them. We show that all three are built on weighted averages of one curve, the Youden index $J(t) = \mathrm{TPR}(t) - \mathrm{FPR}(t)$ across cutoffs $t$, and that the averages differ in the weights they put on the cutoffs. Each weights a cutoff by how much something rises across it: for AUC, the distribution of all scores; for the Brier score, the true probability $\mathbb{E}[Y \mid S]$; for AUC$_π$, the decision maker's probability of acting. Up to normalization, AUC$_π$ is the Brier skill score of the ideal forecast with its weight moved to the cutoffs the decision maker cares about. We also show that weighting pairs by $|π(s) - π(s')|$ is, up to scale, the only pair weight fixed in advance that makes a pair-weighted AUC an average of the Youden curve for every score distribution. As a ranking measure, AUC weights every model the same way. Hand (2009) shows that it can also be read as an average over cost thresholds, and in that reading each model weights the thresholds differently. The numerator of AUC$_π$, which we call the policy Youden index, is the expected share of class 1 a fixed policy acts on minus the expected share of class 0. It judges every model by the same policy and so avoids this; the full ratio AUC$_π$ does not.
#04Nov 10, 2026
cs.CV
C$^2$-Routing: Complementary Cropping and Compression for Efficient Vision-Language Inference
Guorui Lu, Qinyu Chen
Visual Question Answering (VQA) imposes substantial computational overhead on vision-language models (VLMs), motivating model-agnostic input reduction methods that can be readily applied across diverse VLMs, including in black-box settings. Simply enforcing a visual-token cap reduces computation, but it can discard information needed to answer the question. A single reduction strategy also struggles to accommodate different scenarios. Our key observation is that cropping and compression are complementary: cropping highlights small targets and local details, whereas whole-image compression better preserves context for large targets or distributed evidence. Based on this observation, we propose C$^2$-Routing, which adaptively selects cropping or compression according to the input image and question. Since both strategies may still discard key information, we further design a safety gate that uses the predicted joint correctness distribution under original and reduced inputs to guide fallback and protect accuracy. To accommodate consumer GPU resource constraints, all training and evaluation experiments run on RTX 3090 GPUs. To measure gains beyond token capping, we use full-image baselines with the same cap of 1,024 visual tokens. We conduct extensive evaluation on three VLMs and 18 datasets spanning local details, global scenes, scene text, and documents. With the visual budget already capped, C$^2$-Routing further reduces end-to-end FLOPs by 36.53% and visual tokens by 42.36% on average, with a mean relative task-score decrease of only 0.77%.
#05Nov 10, 2026
stat.ML
A Theory of Cross-Validation Variance
Nathaniel S. O'Connell, Jaime L. Speiser
Cross-validation estimates predictive performance by repeatedly splitting the data into training and validation sets, fitting the model on the first and evaluating it on the second. Every observation influences the estimate in two roles, through its own evaluation when it is held out and through the models it helps fit when it trains. The random splits determine its weight in each role. From this representation, we prove an exact finite-sample identity for the variance of the cross-validated estimate. For a given splitting scheme with a common training set size, the variance is a function of these weights, with constants of the model, the metric, and the population. It covers metrics averaged over observations, such as mean squared error, and over case--control pairs, such as the AUC. The identity shows which schemes to use. The variance decomposes into sampling variance, which depends only on the training size, and variance due to the random fold splitting, which arises when the weights change from one draw of the splits to the next. K-fold cross-validation, whose weights are equal across observations by design, is therefore variance optimal at first order; Monte Carlo and bootstrap cross-validation are not. The first-order variance of K-fold does not depend on K, and under reasonable conditions on the model leave-one-out has the smallest variance of any K-fold scheme. For the AUC the same holds for leave-pair-out, which evaluates every case--control pair. Finally, we show the cross-validated estimate is asymptotically normal with the identity's full variance. Together, these results provide a general theoretical foundation for inference on cross-validated performance and establish principles for selecting variance-optimal cross-validation designs.